Security should be provided free of cost in cases where there is a threat perception to a person.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.Court Cell- I/1817/99670/2019, dated 25.03.2021 and quash the same and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to provide adequate Police protection to the petitioner as per the directions of High Court of Madras in W.P.No.1650 of 2021, dated 11.03.2021.)

1. This petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the second respondent, dated 25.03.2021 and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to provide adequate Police protection to the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr.Ma.Gouthaman, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents.

3. The facts of the present case have been captured in the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.1650 of 2021, dated 11.03.2021 and for proper appreciation, the same is extracted hereunder:-

"2. The petitioner is holding the post of General Secretary of the All India Association in Southern Railways and he is also holding the post of Vice President of All India other backward Classes Railway Employees Federation. The petitioner is also the State President of National Union for BC, SC, ST and minorities. According to the petitioner, the persons who were holding the post of General Secretary since the year 2000, have been done away with by some rowdy elements and there is a potential threat to the life of the petitioner also. The petitioner gave a complaint in this regard on 19.10.2020 and the police had issued a CSR and no further action was taken. The petitioner had also applied for a gun license for his protection and he has also been issued a gun license and the petitioner is possessing a 32 bore revolver.

3. The petitioner found that, the threat perspective was getting more graver and therefore, one more representation was given to the respondent police on 18.11.2020 Since there was no response, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

4. A status report has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police. It is seen from the status report that there are no criminal cases pending against the petitioner and the movement of the petitioner is being monitored by the respondent police all the time and there is no potential threat to the life of the petitioner.

5. It is brought to the notice of this Court that owing to the ensuing election, the petitioner has also deposited his revolver on 03.03.2021. It cannot be said that the apprehension raised by the petitioner is unfounded.

6. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the second respondent namely Commissioner of Police, Chennai to pass appropriate orders deputing a police guard to the petitioner for a period of four weeks. The petitioner shall pay whatever minimum charges are payable for providing such guard.

7. Post this case after four weeks and in the meantime, a status report shall be filed by assessing the threat perspective of the petitioner and based on the status report, further orders will passed."

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Police protection was given only for a period of four weeks and thereafter, the second respondent, through impugned proceedings, dated 25.03.2021, directed the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.1,67,328/- towards guard charges within three days.

5. It was contended on the side of the petitioner that such exorbitant charges were imposed by the second respondent based on a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.139, dated 04.03.2019 and the said G.O will not apply where the security is provided to an individual. It was submitted that such charges can be imposed only where private mega events are conducted and such bandobast is sought for by Central / State Government